Skip to main content

Security report for lomography.com

Lomography · Retail · Austria

High risk. 5 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, SSL/TLS and 1 other check.

Security score

43/100

Risk levelHigh

0–100, higher is better. How it is calculated

Lomography is a well-established analogue photography community and e-commerce platform founded in 1994, offering a wide range of analogue cameras, films, lenses, and educational content. The website demonstrates excellent content quality, user experience, and community engagement, targeting photography enthusiasts globally. Technically, the site uses a modern stack with nginx and Phusion Passenger, and employs Google Tag Manager for analytics and marketing. However, a critical security gap exists as the site lacks a valid SSL/TLS certificate and does not serve content over HTTPS, exposing users to potential interception risks. Privacy compliance is strong with clear policies and cookie consent mechanisms. Overall, the business credibility is high, but the security posture requires urgent improvement to protect users and maintain trust.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
18/ 100 · Critical
Checks completed
7of 7

NIS2 Art. 21(2)

  1. (a) Risk analysis and security policies: Not visible from outside
  2. (b) Incident handling: One indicator
  3. (c) Business continuity, backups and crisis management: Not visible from outside
  4. (d) Supply chain security: Not visible from outside
  5. (e) Secure acquisition, development and maintenance, including vulnerability handling: Partly checked
  6. (f) Assessing the effectiveness of security measures: Not visible from outside
  7. (g) Cyber hygiene and security training: Not visible from outside
  8. (h) Cryptography and encryption: Partly checked
  9. (i) HR security, access control and asset management: One indicator
  10. (j) Multi-factor authentication and secured communications: Not visible from outside

This scan rated NIS2 with an earlier keyword method that is no longer shown; rescan for the per-article view. Risk management, continuity, supply chain, training, MFA, management oversight (Art. 20) and incident reporting (Art. 23) need internal evidence, and Guard cannot tell whether NIS2 applies to this organisation.

GDPR is indicative only, based on publicly visible signals: Articles 7, 12, 13 and 32 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Article 5(3) of the ePrivacy Directive. Not a certification or legal assessment.

Priority findings

5 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. GDPR outside view

    These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.

    • Critical

      No HTTPS encryption

      GDPR requires appropriate security measures for personal data

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate for HTTPS

    • High

      No Cookie Policy found

      GDPR requires clear information about cookie usage

      What to do: Add a dedicated cookie policy explaining cookie usage and purposes

    • High

      No Cookie Consent Banner found

      GDPR requires explicit consent for non-essential cookies

      What to do: Implement a cookie consent banner that appears on first visit

  2. SSL/TLS

    TLS encrypts the connection and proves the site is really yours. Weak or expiring certificates trigger browser warnings and put traffic at risk.

    • Critical

      No HTTPS Encryption

      Website does not use HTTPS encryption, making all data transmission vulnerable to interception

      What to do: Implement SSL/TLS certificate and redirect all HTTP traffic to HTTPS

  3. Security headers

    Security headers are instructions your web server sends to every visitor’s browser. Missing ones leave visitors more exposed to attacks such as clickjacking and injected scripts.

    • High

      Missing Content-Security-Policy header

      Controls resources the browser is allowed to load

      What to do: Implement a Content-Security-Policy appropriate for your application

      • ASVS V3.4.3
      • OWASP Secure Headers: OWASP Secure Headers Project recommends Content-Security-Policy: default-src 'self'; form-action 'self'; base-uri 'self'; object-src 'none';…

Need hands-on remediation? Email guard@offseq.com

Keep watching lomography.com

This scan found 15 issues across 6 checks. Monitoring re-runs those checks daily, emails you when something material changes and records each fix, so you can show progress.

Daily monitoring

Recommended

€25per month

  • TLS certificates and expiry
  • DNS records
  • SPF, DKIM and DMARC
  • Security headers
  • GDPR and NIS2 posture
  • Exposed services
  • Third-party trackers
  • Security score drift

Email alerts on material changes and an exportable JSON history of every change.

Billed monthly to your card. Cancel anytime. The full timeline opens with your unlock code.

Full report

€39.90one-time

  • The complete analysis as a PDF you can cite
  • Email delivery with an unlock code
  • Lifetime access to this report

Prices incl. 21% VAT. Secure checkout by Mollie; sold by SEQ SIA, Latvia.

Results by check

Each check with its score, findings and the evidence it collected.

How this score is calculated

The security score runs 0–100, higher is better. It is the plain average of the security checks that completed in this scan, each counted equally. A check that could not run is left out: it counts neither as a pass nor as a fail.

Counted in this score

SSL/TLS
0
Security headers
65
Email security
50
DNS health
85
Network security
40
GDPR outside view
18
Average
43

Not counted

  • NIS2 outside view: Re-weights evidence from the TLS, email, DNS, network and hygiene checks, so counting it would count that evidence twice. Shown on its own.
  • OffSeq Observations: An AI reading of the site, useful context but not reproducible evidence. Shown on its own.

Findings that cap the score at 49

Each of these is serious on its own, so while any is present the site cannot rate better than high risk, however good the other checks are.

  • The certificate is not trusted by browsers
  • The website is not served over HTTPS
  • A database, remote desktop, file-sharing or Telnet service is reachable from the internet
  • The page loads a script from a compromised source
  • The domain registration has expired
  • SPF authorises every server to send mail as the domain

Partial scans

When the site blocks Guard or most checks cannot run, the score covers only the checks that ran (usually DNS and email), is capped at 75 and is shown as partial, without a risk level.

Risk levels

  • Critical0–25
  • High26–49
  • Medium50–75
  • Low76–100

Technical appendix

Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.

Business context

Business profile

Lomography operates in the niche retail and media sector focused on analogue photography. Its business model combines product sales with community-driven content and educational offerings, fostering a loyal user base. The company maintains a consistent brand presence with multiple international localized sites and active social media channels. The domain age and registration details align well with the company's history, supporting legitimacy. Lomography's partnerships include its own shop and account management domains, enhancing user experience. Growth indicators include frequent content updates, competitions, and events. The company targets creative individuals passionate about analogue photography, leveraging a unique market position with limited direct competition.

Security posture

The website implements several security headers such as X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options, and Referrer-Policy, indicating awareness of security best practices. However, the absence of HTTPS and TLS protocols is a critical vulnerability, severely undermining user data confidentiality and integrity. No evidence of incident response or security policy documentation was found, which could impact preparedness for security events. The cookie consent mechanism is present, supporting privacy compliance. The site does not expose sensitive data or use vulnerable libraries based on available data. Overall, the security maturity is low due to missing encryption and incomplete security governance visibility.

Recommendations

  1. Implement a valid SSL/TLS certificate and enforce HTTPS site-wide immediately.
  2. Enable modern TLS protocols (TLS 1.2 or TLS 1.3) and disable insecure protocols.
  3. Activate HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS) with includeSubDomains and preload flags.
  4. Publish a clear security policy and incident response contact information on the website.
  5. Review and enhance security headers, including enabling Content Security Policy (CSP).
  6. Regularly audit third-party scripts and libraries for vulnerabilities.
  7. Improve transparency on data retention policies and user privacy controls.
  8. Maintain consistent branding and trust signals across all localized domains.
  9. Enhance accessibility features and mobile optimization further.
  10. Continue active community engagement and content freshness to sustain market position.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is hosted on an Ubuntu server running nginx with Phusion Passenger, serving dynamic content with JavaScript and CSS assets loaded from dedicated CDNs. The site uses Google Tag Manager for analytics and marketing integration. Performance metrics are not provided but the site structure and asset preloading indicate moderate optimization. The site is mobile responsive with good accessibility and SEO practices, including meta tags and Open Graph data. No CMS was detected, suggesting a custom or proprietary platform. The lack of SSL/TLS is a major technical deficiency. DNS records show consistent MX and NS configurations with Google mail services. Overall, the technical infrastructure is solid but requires modernization in security protocols.
Standards and sources

Reference chips under each finding point to the standard, regulation or specification the finding relates to. They are taken from the official datasets below and mapped conservatively: a finding with no defensible link shows none. NIS2 and GDPR references mark where a finding is relevant evidence, not a compliance verdict. Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690 binds digital infrastructure and digital service providers; for other entities it is the most detailed public reading of the Article 21 measures. WCAG, EN 301 549, European Accessibility Act and Web Accessibility Directive references name the requirement an automated accessibility rule relates to; they are not a conformance verdict.

Retrieved 2026-10-25

Reviews of this site

Share your experience with lomography.com. Every review is verified by email and published after moderation.

Overall rating
Select a rating
4000 characters remaining

We’ll email you to confirm your review and keep your details private.

Community rating

No published reviews yet. Be the first to review lomography.com.

Feedback on this report

Rate this report, add an optional comment, and tell us if you want a security specialist to follow up.

Overall report quality
Select a rating
2000 characters remaining

We only use your feedback to improve Guard reports. Contact details are never shared.